Rhetorical Silence, Part 2: Silence and Agency

Karlyn Campbell writes that agency is the capacity to speak or write in ways that are understood by people in one’s own community. Much rhetorical theory on agency focuses on speech and action, but silence too can be an expression of agency. Studying silences can also reveal who has agency and how it is used in discourse situations.

In Unspoken: A Rhetoric of Silence, Cheryl Glenn writes, “Silence exists in overlapping states: environmental, locational, communal, and personal. It can be self- or other-initiated, self- or other derived. Silence can be something one does, something that is done to someone, or something that one experiences. However it takes shape, the form of silence (the delivery) is always the same, but the function of the specific acts, states, phenomena of silence – that is, its interpretation and its effect on other people – varies according to the social-rhetorical context in which it occurs” (Glenn 9). This quotation from Unspoken articulates the possibilities of agency in silence.

Consider again the example of the student who does not say the pledge of allegiance. The student is in a classroom community, where silence and speech are often very clearly regulated. There are certain actions and statements that are expected in the classroom. A very basic one is to respond with “here” or “present” when roll is called. Another one is speak when called upon – or to stay silent until called upon. It is generally expected (though not required) that students stand and say the Pledge in the morning. This is a sort of communal speech act that discourses about and affirms a shared value. When a student does not participate, he or she is taking silence, rather than it being given or expected. Silence in this case is quite active: the student steps away from the community for a time and does not affirm this particular value. This unexpected silence adds to the discourse: paradoxically, it adds another active (though not disruptive) voice. The discourse about patriotism expressed by the speech act has become more complex. (This is not to say that all of the people saying the Pledge believe the same thing – rather, this is about what people are actively saying or doing.)

As a teacher, I notice silence in my classroom. Sometimes silent students are engaged in discourse outside my classroom (texting). Other times, their silence communicates disinterest, confusion, or a quiet protest against the lesson for any variety of reasons. Yet, these students are part of the discourse situation. The silent students are sometimes (though not always) making statements, or taking agency. In any given class period, I offer several ways for my students to speak or write in ways that the community recognizes. These are prescribed (or required) agencies. However, students do not have to accept these agencies. Refusal to speak or to write – taking silence – is one way that they can take an agency I do not give them. Their refusal communicates something to me and to classmates (and often it isn’t the same message). As the teacher, I am in a position of power and in a situation where I can determine how student will have (or will not have) agency. Students can get in trouble for the some of the ways they use language to take agency. However, it is harder to get in trouble when using silence, and so it can be an effective way of communicating dissent to the teacher or a way of taking away some of the power the teacher has to control or shape classroom discourse.

Agents in a discourse situation can use silence – it is a way to communicate something, and even if the silence is unexplained, it adds to the discourse situation. The addition of silence makes a discourse situation and the power play more complex. By noticing the silent “voices” in discourse more agents and types of agency are seen.